On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 10:50:47AM +0300, Jarno Elonen wrote:
> The way I understand it, this is wrong: you can't simply add a new clause
> like
> that to GPL, as you couldn't then compile *your* software against *other*
> GPL'd stuff.
Sure you can, providing you don't introduce any new GPL-in
Has anyone "VIP" of Debian written the openssl developers about the issue? I
can't believe they would be *totally* unwilling to remove the advertising
clause..?
The OpenSSL FAQ states that:
"If you develop open source software that uses OpenSSL, you may find it useful
to choose an other licens
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 04:02:09PM -0700, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Great! Once you finish the patch let me know and I will see about
> > getting it incorporated upstream, unless you already know someone to
> > send it to.
>
> That might take a while,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Mittwoch, 31. Juli 2002 01:08 schrieb Daniel Schepler:
> Hendrik Sattler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Am Dienstag, 30. Juli 2002 02:24 schrieb Daniel Schepler:
> > > Something has been bothering me about the KDE packages... The OpenSSL
> > > lic
No it is the problem of OpenSSL license for being obnoxious ;)
Chris
Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Great! Once you finish the patch let me know and I will see about
> getting it incorporated upstream, unless you already know someone to
> send it to.
That might take a while, since I know nothing about how to program for
openssl or gnutls, or how the cu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Mittwoch, 31. Juli 2002 01:00 schrieb Chris Cheney:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 12:56:49AM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 30. Juli 2002 02:24 schrieb Daniel Schepler:
> > > Something has been bothering me about the KDE packages... The
Hendrik Sattler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Am Dienstag, 30. Juli 2002 02:24 schrieb Daniel Schepler:
> > Something has been bothering me about the KDE packages... The OpenSSL
> > license is incompatible with the GPL, but Konqueror et al use the
>
> Can you actually tell me, where it is incomp
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 12:56:49AM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Am Dienstag, 30. Juli 2002 02:24 schrieb Daniel Schepler:
> > Something has been bothering me about the KDE packages... The OpenSSL
> > license is incompatible with the GPL, but
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Dienstag, 30. Juli 2002 02:24 schrieb Daniel Schepler:
> Something has been bothering me about the KDE packages... The OpenSSL
> license is incompatible with the GPL, but Konqueror et al use the
Can you actually tell me, where it is incompatible?
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 03:36:33PM -0700, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Is gnutls lgpl yet? Otherwise, I am pretty certain KDE upstream will
> > refuse a gnutls patch. If it is lgpl it shouldn't be too hard to
> > convince them to take the patch.
> >
> >
Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is gnutls lgpl yet? Otherwise, I am pretty certain KDE upstream will
> refuse a gnutls patch. If it is lgpl it shouldn't be too hard to
> convince them to take the patch.
>
> Chris
According to the debian copyright file, the main gnutls library is
LGPL,
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 12:30:21AM +0200, Maximilian Reiss wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 31. Juli 2002 00:23 schrieb Chris Cheney:
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 02:38:42PM +0200, Maximilian Reiss wrote:
> > > No gpl violation. KDE does _not_ link against libssl.
> > >
> > > Max
> >
> > Oh yes it does... H
Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 02:38:42PM +0200, Maximilian Reiss wrote:
> > No gpl violation. KDE does _not_ link against libssl.
> >
> > Max
>
> Oh yes it does... However, the parts of KDE that do link to libssl in
> 3.x are now lgpl'd so the issue shou
Am Mittwoch, 31. Juli 2002 00:23 schrieb Chris Cheney:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 02:38:42PM +0200, Maximilian Reiss wrote:
> > No gpl violation. KDE does _not_ link against libssl.
> >
> > Max
>
> Oh yes it does... However, the parts of KDE that do link to libssl in
> 3.x are now lgpl'd so the
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 03:26:56PM -0700, Daniel Schepler wrote:
-snip-
> reinstated by the authors of the code involved.) So I'd prefer to
> approach them with something like "here's a patch which allows KDE to
> use gnutls instead of libssl, which resolves license
> incompatibilities." I'd susp
Achim Bohnet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> No https? No spop? No imaps? No sftp? NO. If really necessary,
> ask upstream to resolve the conflict. Don't make Debian KDE not useable
> before trying to find a real fix upstream.
>
> Please don't 'solve' the conflict on the should
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 02:38:42PM +0200, Maximilian Reiss wrote:
> No gpl violation. KDE does _not_ link against libssl.
>
> Max
Oh yes it does... However, the parts of KDE that do link to libssl in
3.x are now lgpl'd so the issue should not matter (I think)?
Chris
Maximilian Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Am Dienstag, 30. Juli 2002 02:24 schrieb Daniel Schepler:
> > Something has been bothering me about the KDE packages... The OpenSSL
> > license is incompatible with the GPL, but Konqueror et al use the
> > library. I just checked and, indeed, I foun
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 02:38:42PM +0200, Maximilian Reiss wrote:
> No gpl violation. KDE does _not_ link against libssl.
kdebase-crypto depends on libssl because libkcm_crypto is linked against
libssl.
--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
--
To UNSUBSC
Am Dienstag, 30. Juli 2002 02:24 schrieb Daniel Schepler:
> Something has been bothering me about the KDE packages... The OpenSSL
> license is incompatible with the GPL, but Konqueror et al use the
> library. I just checked and, indeed, I found that libssl.so.0.9.6 and
> libqt-mt.so.3.0.4 are lin
On Tuesday 30 July 2002 02:24, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> Something has been bothering me about the KDE packages... The OpenSSL
> license is incompatible with the GPL, but Konqueror et al use the
> library. I just checked and, indeed, I found that libssl.so.0.9.6 and
> libqt-mt.so.3.0.4 are linked
Something has been bothering me about the KDE packages... The OpenSSL
license is incompatible with the GPL, but Konqueror et al use the
library. I just checked and, indeed, I found that libssl.so.0.9.6 and
libqt-mt.so.3.0.4 are linked into the same address space (in the
kio_http process forked of
23 matches
Mail list logo
